“It is the sacrosanct duty to render financial support even if the husband is required to earn money with physical labour, if he is able bodied. There is no escape route unless there is an order from the court that the wife is not entitled to get maintenance from the husband on any legally permissible grounds,” it said.

What exactly are the sacrosanct duties of a wife? You might ask… Nothing really, as per the law, because the so called ‘patriarchal’ male dominated parliament never thought a need would arise to prescribe any duties for wives because they all will do their god-given duties anyway The grand ‘patriarchy’ will make sure that they are chained to the home and hearth and for not a moment even entertain a thought of escaping from their duties.

But for that rascal called husband, of course, for him we need to provide strict duties of maintaining wife even with physical labour. Actually I think there should be scheme like MNREGA for husbands (whether urban or rural) who are without income and have to pay maintenance still, so that they can at least have an assured income.

Actually, there is no new principle in above judgment. This has been the standard mantra of courts … beg, borrow, steal but pay maintenance to wife. Even a senior civil judge gave ‘advice’ to me off the record, “you should beg, borrow, steal and settle these cases”. Yeah right. I will play kabaddi in free time rather than settle anything! Give this advice to your son when your daughter-in-law drags all of you into the legal jungle of your creation.

How about this patriarchal male? Should he pay maintenance too?

Further news is interesting in a different way altogether:

Nine years later, the family court granted her a monthly maintenance of Rs 2,500 and her son Rs 1,500. On appeal, the high court granted her maintenance from 2002 on learning that the husband paid her nothing during pendency of the petition before the family court. The husband challenged the decision in SC.

The bench of Justices Misra and Gowda said, “Dilatory tactics by any of the parties has to be sternly dealt with, for the family court judge has to be alive to the fact that the litigation before him pertains to emotional fragmentation and delay can feed it to grow.

“We hope and trust that family court judges shall remain alert to this and decide matters as expeditiously as possible keeping in view the objects and reasons of the Act and the scheme of various provisions pertaining to grant of maintenance, divorce, custody of child and property disputes.”

If anyone is awake in judiciary, they must know that family courts are not any different from other courts when it comes to tareekh pe tareekh (continuous adjournments) way of doing things. They will decide divorce case when parties are already approaching old age, decide child custody when child has finished major part of his/her growing life. As to maintenance, you can yourself see they took 9 years to decide on maintenance. Must have been a really tough case to crack! Phew… the judges sure need their summer vacation.

Comments

I was a reasonably happy self employed professional consultant until I got married. Being unable to pursue my profession with the same vigour or intensity as I did before, sunk deep in marital wars’ clinically diagnosed depression and anxiety, I barely earn 1/50th of what I used to, and that too goes to my Psychiatrist. Probably now I should chop off an arm or leg also so the Court does not ask me to pay maintenance by doing physical labour.

Earnings may be from physical or mental labour.So the court’s observation is not anything new.A vast majority of India’s population earn from physical labour only. However, those who earn by mental labour only and are incapable of doing any physical labour, when such persons’ mental health is jeopardized, they cannot be expected to earn. Neither Sec 125 of CrPC nor the above Court order is applicable to/ enforceable on, them.In that situation other capable members of the family will maintain the family. This is, of course, an unusual situation.This is implicit in Sec 125 of CrPC, Hindu Adoption and Maint. Act- but explicit in HMA which gender-neutral.